Achieving universal healthcare access in South Africa: A policy analysis of consensus reform proposals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7196/SAMJ.2025.v115i6.3673Keywords:
universal health coverage, National Health Insurance, Medical schemes, Health equity, SubsidiarityAbstract
Background. South Africa’s ongoing efforts to realise universal health coverage (UHC) have produced three discernible policy trajectories: UHC0, the de facto configuration of public and private health systems; UHC1, the incremental reform framework initiated post 1994 and recently revisited by the Universal Healthcare Access Coalition; and UHC2, the centralised National Health Insurance approach formalised in a 2017 White Paper.
Objective. To offer a comparative analysis between the three alternative policy trajectories, to determine which offers the most productive pathway to deepen UHC.
Methods. This analysis uses the organising principle of subsidiarity, which argues that decision-making authority should be handled at the most local level possible, with higher levels stepping in only when needed. A qualitative comparative policy analysis methodology is applied to assess the institutional design, financial sustainability, governance integrity, implementation feasibility and equity outcomes of these approaches.
Results. Drawing from primary policy documents, the study finds that UHC1 provides the most feasible and constitutionally aligned pathway for realising UHC. UHC2, by way of contrast, is least likely to be implemented, with design features that deviate substantially from the principle of subsidiarity. UHC0, the status quo option, also incorporates severe deviations from the principle of subsidiarity and is likely to perpetuate systemic inequity and poor outcomes. Importantly, continued attempts to implement UHC2 effectively converge on UHC0, with the result that UHC0 is likely to continue indefinitely unless revised toward UHC1.
Conclusion. Of the three options, UHC1, as envisaged in the 1990s, remains the most viable approach to deepen UHC, with UHC2 unlikely to achieve any key UHC goals owing to design weaknesses that deviate from the principle of subsidiarity and financial constraints. Attempts to implement UHC2, thereby obstructing the implementation of key aspects of UHC1, defaults the health system to the residual UHC0 approach – which lacks any strategic vision for deepening UHC.
References
1. National Department of Health, South Africa. Health White Paper. Notice 667 OF 1997. Pretoria: Government Gazette, 1997.
2. African National Congress. 52nd National Conference: Resolutions. Pretoria: ANC, 2007.
3. Minister of Health, South Africa. White Paper: Towards a national health insurance policy. Pretoria:
Government Gazette, 2017.
4. South Africa. National Health Insurance Act No. 20 of 2023.
5. Moonstone.WhattheBHFandHASAarearguingintheirlegalchallengestotheNHIAct.Moonstone,
6 March 2025 .https://www.moonstone.co.za/what-the-bhf-and-hasa-are-arguing-in-their-legal-
challenges-to-the-nhi-act/ (accessed 20 May 2025).
6. Universal Healthcare Access Coalition. Universal healthcare access for South Africa. UHAC, February
2025. https://progressivehealthforum.net/uhac/ (accessed 20 May 2025).
7. World Health Organization, World Bank Group. Tracking universal health coverage: 2023 global
monitoring report. Geneva: World Health Organization and International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development/World Bank, 2023.
8. South Africa. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
9. Minister of Health, South Africa. Medical Schemes Bill No. 131 of 1998: General explanatory note.
Pretoria: South Africa, 1998.
10. National Department of Health, South Africa. Inquiry into various social security aspects of the South
African Health system: Based on the health subcommittee findings of the Committee of Inquiry into a
Comprehensive System of Social Security (Taylor Committee) 2002. Pretoria: NDoH, 2022.
11. Taylor Committee, Transforming the present – protecting the future: Report of the Committee of
Inquiry into a Comprehensive System of Social Security for South Africa. Taylor Committee, 2002. 12. Armstrong J, Deeble J, Dror DM, Rice N, Thiede M, van de Ven WPMM. Report to the South African Risk Equalisation Fund Task Group by the International Review Panel. 2004. https://www. medicalschemes.com/files/Risk%20Equalisation%20Fund/REF_InternationalReviewPanel_Jan_2004.
pdf (accessed 25 May 2025).
13. Ministerial Task Team on Social Health Insurance, South Africa. Social health insurance options:
Financial and fiscal impact assessment. Pretoria: National Department of Health, 2005.
14. Beresford B. War over healthcare. Mail & Guardian, 15 September 2008.
15. Task Team on National Health Insurance. National Health Insurance Plan for South Africa. Pretoria:
African National Congress Subcommittee on Health and Education, 16 February 2009.
16. Bhana A. Treasury reassures private sector over National Health Insurance fears. Mail and Guardian, 2025. https://mg.co.za/business/2025-04-07-treasury-reassures-private-sector-over-national-health-
insurance-fears/ (accessed 7 April 2025).
17. World Health Organization. Global Health Observatory data. Geneva: WHO, 2000 - 2021.
18. Føllesdal A. Survey article: Subsidiarity. J Political Philos 1998;6(2):190-218. https://doi.
org/10.111/1467-9760.00052
19. Moroni S. Revisiting subsidiarity: Not only administrative decentralisation but also multidimensional polycentrism. Cities 2024;155:105463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105463
20. Martini A, Spataro L. The principle of subsidiarity and the ethical factor in Giuseppe Toniolo’s Thought. J Bus Ethics 2018;153(1):105-119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3407-0
21. Panara C. Subsidiarity v. autonomy in the EU. European Public Law 2022;28(2):269-296. https://doi. org/10.54648/euro2022014
49. Naape B, Mahonye N. Does South Africa’s tax effort fall short of its tax capacity? Development Southern Africa. 2021;38(5):750-768.
22. Jachtenfuchs M, Krisch N. Subsidiarity in global governance. Law Contemp Prob 2016;79(2):1-26.
23. Oates WE. An essay on fiscal federalism. J Econ Literat 1999;37(3):1120-1149.
24. South Africa. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993 (Repealed): Government
Gazette, 1993.
25. Health Market Inquiry. Final findings and recommendations. Pretoria: Competition Commission
(South Africa), September 2019.
26. Dhai A, Mahomed S. Healthcare in crisis: A shameful disrespect of our Constitution. S Afr J Bioethics
Law 2018;11(1):8-10. https://doi.org/10.7196/SAJBL.2018.v11i1.649
27. Rispel LC. Analysing the progress and fault lines of health sector transformation in South Africa. S Afr
Health Rev 2016;2016:17-23.
28. Van den Heever AM. Corruption, leadership and the corrosion of public health system capabilities in
South Africa. In: Dhai A, Ballot D, Vellor M, eds. Pandemics and Health Care. 1st ed. Cape Town: Juta
and Company (Pty) Ltd, 2021:110-125.
29. Eastern Cape Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Bhisho: Eastern Cape
DoH, 2023.
30. Free State Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Bloemfontein: Free State
DoH, 2023.
31. Gauteng Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 2023/24. Pretoria:: Gauteng DoH, 2023.
32. KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. KwaZulu-Natal: KwaZulu-
Natal DoH, 2023.
33. Limpopo Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Polokwane: Limpopo DoH, 2023. 34. Mpumalanga Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Nelspruit: Mpumalanga
DoH, 2023.
35. North West Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Mahikeng: North West
DoH, 2023.
36. Northern Cape Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Kimberley: Northern
Cape DoH, 2023.
37. Western Cape Department of Health. Annual reports 2015/16 - 2023/24. Cape Town: Western Cape
DoH, 2023.
38. National Treasury, South Africa. Budget Review 2025. Pretoria: National Treasury, 2025.
39. Van den Heever AM. Roadmaps to managed competition: To what extent does South Africa meet
the preconditions for equity and efficiency? Health Econ Pol Law 2024:1-18. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1744133123000324
40. National Department of Health, South Africa. Saving Mothers 2023: Annual Report on confidential inquiries into maternal death in South Africa. Pretoria: National Department of Health, 2023.
41. Health Market Inquiry. Provisional findings and recommendations report. Pretoria: Competition Commission (South Africa), 2018.
42. Van den Heever AM. National Health Insurance Bill review: Expert review of the National Health Insurance Bill submitted by the Minister of Health to Parliament in 2019 for submission to Parliament as a response to the request for public comment. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand, 2025.
43. Genesis Analytics, Centre for Health Policy, PWC. Evaluation of Phase 1 implementation of interventions in the National Health Insurance (NHI) pilot districts in South Africa NDOH10/2017- 2018: Final Evaluation Report. Johannesburg: Genesis Analytics, July 2019.
44. Van den Heever AM. Country report: South Africa. In: Sauter W, Boertjens J, Manen JV, Mikkers M, eds. The Law and Policy of Healthcare Financing: An International Comparison of Models and Outcomes. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2019:413-434.
45. Van den Heever AM. Preparedness for epidemics in South Africa: The health system and proposals for National Health Insurance. In: Mazibuko Z, ed. Epidemics and Healthcare Systems in Africa. Johannesburg: Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection, 2019:413.
46. Council for Medical Schemes. Evaluation of medical schemes’ cost increases: Findings and recommendations. Pretoria: CMS, 2008.
47. Van den Heever AM. South Africa’s universal health coverage reforms in the post-apartheid period. Health Policy 2016;120(12):1420-1428. https://doi.org/j.healthpol.2016.05.012
48. National Treasury, South Africa. Budget Review 2024. Pretoria: National Treasury, 21 February 2024. 49. Naape B, Mahonye N. Does South Africa’s tax effort fall short of its tax capacity? Development South
Afr 2021;38(5):750-768.
50. Khan T. NHI will take years to implement, says Treasury. Business Day, 8 May 2024.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 A M van den Heever

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Licensing Information
The SAMJ is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
Publishing Rights
Authors grant the Publisher the exclusive right to publish, display, reproduce and/or distribute the Work in print and electronic format and in any medium known or hereafter developed, including for commercial use. The Author also agrees that the Publisher may retain in print or electronic format more than one copy of the Work for the purpose of preservation, security and back-up.